The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) on Friday, reserved judgment in the petition of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) seeking the disqualification of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu from the February 25 presidential election on grounds of unlawful nomination.
The court adjourned indefinitely after parties in the matter adopted their final addresses to prove their case.
The party is before the court praying it to nullify the election of Tinubu on the ground that his Vice Presidential candidate, Kashim Shetima unlawfully allowed himself to be nominated twice for two different constituencies.
Shetima had been nominated by the All Progressives Congress APC as a candidate for Borno Central Senatorial District and was later nominated by the same party as Vice Presidential candidate following the withdrawal of one Kabiru Masari who was the initial Vice Presidential candidate to Tinubu.
Specifically, APM contested that Kashim Shetima and the APC breached the Electoral Act by engaging in the alleged double nomination.
Adopting its final addresses, the party through its counsel, Andrew Malgwu SAN, asked the court to invoke the relevant law to nullify the nomination of Tinubu and Shetima on the ground of unlawful, illegal, and unjustifiable nomination.
However, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) prayed to the Court to dismiss the petition for lacking in merit.
In their response, APC, represented by Prince Lateef Fagbemi SAN, prayed the court to dismiss the petition on all grounds for being frivolous, irritating, and unwarranted.
According to him, the petition was on arrival in view of the Supreme Court judgment that other political parties cannot interfere in the internal affairs of another party, especially on the issue of nomination.
In the same vein, Tinubu and Shetima, who were represented by a legal luminary, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, argued that the APM’S petition ought not to have been filed in the first instance and demanded its outright dismissal.
Olanipekun told the Court that the petition ought to have been withdrawn honourably immediately after the Supreme Court made a pronouncement that no party has the right to dabble into how another party nominated its candidates for elective offices.
Justice Haruna Tsammani then adjourned judgment indefinitely.
